From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Incorrect font weight selected Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 14:22:22 +0200 Message-ID: <83bl0p835t.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87pmpv708h.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83ilvnc6z4.fsf@gnu.org> <875yrmyk8q.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <87y24grwp6.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <877dbzo98z.fsf@gnus.org> <83bl1b12b5.fsf@gnu.org> <837dbz112w.fsf@gnu.org> <71a9cd97-02a6-79d7-6af8-b4aef3d1baa8@yandex.ru> <83y24eyww3.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnjyt9yd.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83sfumyr9c.fsf@gnu.org> <877dbe86tv.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83ee5m9kp7.fsf@gnu.org> <87r19mulkg.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83bl0q9hz6.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtkaujbs.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <838rvu9f35.fsf@gnu.org> <877dbdvjga.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> <83wnjd8hn3.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsq19ouw.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11408"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Yuri D'Elia Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 06 13:24:57 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n5RpA-0002eY-Ps for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 13:24:56 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54402 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Rp9-00078Y-Rd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 07:24:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55382) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5Rma-0002vh-II for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 07:22:16 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=41722 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5RmX-0006Zy-AM; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 07:22:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=kix+XX7Cl6Uk71uY2DYR5XPo3pQwmEB++c+c6LkG3vs=; b=Z2LlPnd0hsiY eMeF/gRxslF9iYxTKYAks1Azv9GmGuqUiiRvil3Dtrx7ymD9g1hK+B7LEsyZMk8TNVm95c9pLFZQu zFb8vVnJMPSDUXv3r1iE9Vc3sgtQ9p3zt/GAiCHynO2pDEnxRVAQIEukhD8w8FLzyEgNvN16p4L5V NvHw/DzrQbNh8Nb53zEPw140AmvXfa4xOPkiL6EIaolGx0glzJGYChsoaL1ROGweFSUD+ojnMUyW+ bJy7I3iNcMoaxna+ou/D9cso7wJ2DZhArU6LHOykIorbdauCmsZPrC7nxnlmLSwxk44jndLhzyz8v XAmvWZipBIQI+C3WB9JDow==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=2931 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n5RmW-0007Lc-Af; Thu, 06 Jan 2022 07:22:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87fsq19ouw.fsf@wavexx.thregr.org> (message from Yuri D'Elia on Thu, 06 Jan 2022 10:46:23 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284313 Archived-At: > From: Yuri D'Elia > Cc: dgutov@yandex.ru, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, larsi@gnus.org, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 10:46:23 +0100 > > On Thu, Jan 06 2022, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> In this sense, the change only fixes the lower-level font selection when > >> opening a face in a single frame, so it doesn't alter how we're > >> propagating the change at all at the moment. > > > > But in doing so, it uses a font spec that came from another frame, > > does it not? > > Yes, but this font spec is the default spec for the frame applied by > upper lisp code already. Not at my desk right now, but I'll try to get a > lisp backtrace of the call involved. Yes, please show that backtrace, I'd like to look into this some more.